Bond v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 71 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 73 later decisions — most recently September 2013 · most notably Brewer v. State (1981), James v. State (1993)
2 federal appellate · 71 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Gregg v. Georgia · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Furman v. Georgia · Jurek v. Texas · Proffitt v. Florida
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 73 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The defendant next assigns as error the manner in which the jury was selected. He contends that the court erred in selecting potential jurors from the property tax roles, since all individuals who do not own property in Porter County were thus excluded. In Taylor v. State, (1973) 260 Ind. 264 , 295 N.E.2d 600 , we held at p. 271, 295 N.E.2d at p. 605 that: ‘The use of lists, whether they be property taxpayers or registered voters, so long as they represent a reasonable cross section of the people of the county, cannot be said to violate the rights of the accused, in the absence of a showing that such use is made in a deliberate attempt to exclude certain groups from jury selection.’ “The defendant has made no attempt to show that any particular groups were deliberately excluded from jury selection. We therefore, find no error in the method in which the jurors were initially called to serve.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Purcell v. State“"[WJhen the accused himself offers evidence of his character ... he opens the door to the subject of his character for the trait placed in issue, and the State can introduce evidence of specific misconduct to depreciate the weight of the evidence presented by the accused; and this is true, even though such evidence may incidentally impute to him other guilt."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Parrish v. State“It is apparent that no harm could come from the incident, hence [defense counsel] sought neither the declaration of a mistrial nor the substitution of an alternate for the exposed juror, and the error was, thereby, waived.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. James v. State
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.